Machine learning-based prediction of postoperative mortality risk after abdominal surgery.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Ji-Hong Yuan, Yong-Mei Jin, Jing-Ye Xiang, Shuang-Shuang Li, Ying-Xi Zhong, Shu-Liu Zhang, Bin Zhao
{"title":"Machine learning-based prediction of postoperative mortality risk after abdominal surgery.","authors":"Ji-Hong Yuan, Yong-Mei Jin, Jing-Ye Xiang, Shuang-Shuang Li, Ying-Xi Zhong, Shu-Liu Zhang, Bin Zhao","doi":"10.4240/wjgs.v17.i4.103696","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Preoperative risk assessments are vital for identifying patients at high risk of postoperative mortality. However, traditional scoring systems can be time consuming. We hypothesized that the use of machine learning models would enable rapid and accurate risk assessments to be performed.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To assess the potential of machine learning algorithms to develop predictive models of mortality risk after abdominal surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 230 individuals who underwent abdominal surgery at the Seventh People's Hospital of Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine between January 2023 and December 2023. Demographic and surgery-related data were collected and used to develop nomogram, decision-tree, random-forest, gradient-boosting, support vector machine, and naïve Bayesian models to predict 30-day mortality risk after abdominal surgery. Models were assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves and compared using the DeLong test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 230 included patients, 52 died and 178 survived. Models were developed using the training cohort (<i>n</i> = 161) and assessed using the validation cohort (<i>n</i> = 68). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for the nomogram, decision-tree, random-forest, gradient-boosting tree, support vector machine, and naïve Bayesian models were 0.908 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.824-0.992], 0.874 (95%CI: 0.785-0.963), 0.928 (95%CI: 0.869-0.987), 0.907 (95%CI: 0.837-0.976), 0.983 (95%CI: 0.959-1.000), and 0.807 (95%CI: 0.702-0.911), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Nomogram, random-forest, gradient-boosting tree, and support vector machine models all demonstrate strong performances for the prediction of postoperative mortality and can be selected based on the clinical circumstances.</p>","PeriodicalId":23759,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery","volume":"17 4","pages":"103696"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12019056/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v17.i4.103696","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Preoperative risk assessments are vital for identifying patients at high risk of postoperative mortality. However, traditional scoring systems can be time consuming. We hypothesized that the use of machine learning models would enable rapid and accurate risk assessments to be performed.

Aim: To assess the potential of machine learning algorithms to develop predictive models of mortality risk after abdominal surgery.

Methods: This retrospective study included 230 individuals who underwent abdominal surgery at the Seventh People's Hospital of Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine between January 2023 and December 2023. Demographic and surgery-related data were collected and used to develop nomogram, decision-tree, random-forest, gradient-boosting, support vector machine, and naïve Bayesian models to predict 30-day mortality risk after abdominal surgery. Models were assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves and compared using the DeLong test.

Results: Of the 230 included patients, 52 died and 178 survived. Models were developed using the training cohort (n = 161) and assessed using the validation cohort (n = 68). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for the nomogram, decision-tree, random-forest, gradient-boosting tree, support vector machine, and naïve Bayesian models were 0.908 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.824-0.992], 0.874 (95%CI: 0.785-0.963), 0.928 (95%CI: 0.869-0.987), 0.907 (95%CI: 0.837-0.976), 0.983 (95%CI: 0.959-1.000), and 0.807 (95%CI: 0.702-0.911), respectively.

Conclusion: Nomogram, random-forest, gradient-boosting tree, and support vector machine models all demonstrate strong performances for the prediction of postoperative mortality and can be selected based on the clinical circumstances.

基于机器学习的腹部手术后死亡风险预测。
背景:术前风险评估对于识别术后死亡率高的患者至关重要。然而,传统的评分系统可能会耗费大量时间。我们假设使用机器学习模型可以进行快速准确的风险评估。目的:评估机器学习算法在腹部手术后死亡风险预测模型中的潜力。方法:本回顾性研究纳入了2023年1月至2023年12月在上海中医药大学第七人民医院接受腹部手术的230例患者。收集人口统计学和手术相关数据并用于建立nomogram、decision-tree、random-forest、gradient-boosting、support vector machine和naïve贝叶斯模型来预测腹部手术后30天的死亡率风险。采用受试者工作特征曲线对模型进行评估,并用DeLong检验对模型进行比较。结果:230例患者中,52例死亡,178例存活。使用培训队列(n = 161)开发模型,并使用验证队列(n = 68)进行评估。诺图、决策树、随机森林、梯度增强树、支持向量机和naïve贝叶斯模型的受试者工作特征曲线下面积分别为0.908(95%置信区间0.824 ~ 0.992)、0.874(95%置信区间0.785 ~ 0.963)、0.928(95%置信区间0.869 ~ 0.987)、0.907(95%置信区间0.837 ~ 0.976)、0.983(95%置信区间0.959 ~ 1.000)和0.807(95%置信区间0.702 ~ 0.911)。结论:Nomogram、random-forest、gradient-boosting tree、support vector machine等模型对术后死亡率的预测均有较好的效果,可根据临床情况进行选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
5.00%
发文量
111
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信